Options
Quintessential Mid 90's Loser Cars
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Funny... I saw one in a parking lot last night. Actually in really nice shape with handicapped sticker. I thought of bringing it up here, but you beat me to it. What was up with the rear stying?
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
Even this Craigslist $750 Beretta doesn't look that horrible..
There are worse choices from the loser perspective: Try this test
Choose one
Beretta - Dynasty
Beretta - Justy
Beretta - Suzuki X90
Beretta - Skylark
Beretta - Tempo
I think that the Beretta is a darn poor choice, but not obvious loser material
As far as I'm concerned, THIS is a what a Continental should be!
I agree, however I wouldn't mind getting my hands on a 91 or 92 MK VII LSC. As for the Continental everytime I see one I can't help but compare it to a Cadillac Cimarron (of course, its not quite that bad?)
What was your pic of it didn't show up for me?
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
And I agree, the Beretta's styling isn't too bad. My biggest issue is that a few of the parts just seem disproportionate. For instance, the beltline's too low, the side windows are too big, and the taillights also seem oversized. I like a car with lots of glass area, but on the Beretta I think they just went too far. My beef with the Beretta, however, was the interior...both quality of materials and comfort/room.
Oh, on the way to work this morning, I saw the Die-Nasty's big brother, for sale. A 1992 or so 5th Ave...
Why do I like them so much? I think because the front with the hidden headlights reminds me of late 70s Lincolns ( on a much smaller scale)
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
In contrast though, I never really cared for the style of the Mark VIII. I'm sure it was still a vast improvement over a T-bird or Cougar, but it just still reminded me too much of them. Didn't they have a DOHC 4.6 that put out something like 300 hp, though? That must've been impressive.
BTW, the '79 New Yorker owes its look to Ford, as some of its stylists jumped ship to Mopar a couple years before Iacocca, which probably explains a lot of the similarities in styling.
I actually kind of like these but fear their transmissions and puny V-6 engines. A Buick Park Avenue is exponentially more reliable.
Yeah by the end it was very close to 300. I always liked those and have driven them, pretty quick and nice riding. Lots to go wrong though (air ride, etc)
2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Ram 1500 Bighorn, Built to Serve
I guess you might as well just go all the way and get the Imperial, but I prefer the 5th Ave with the more upright front-end and the vertical taillights. Although the Imperial's full-width taillights are more like those on my '79 NY'ers.
These boxy NY'ers, 5th Aves, Imperials, and Dynasties must have looked really out-of-place in final-year 1993, sitting in the showroom alongside the new Intrepids and Concordes.
I say the Aerostar is a front runner too. It's a van, it's old, and it's sorta ugly looking today. That's three strikes and the date is off!
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
To a car that brings to mind loser, it must be readily identifyable, like Tempo or Cavalier. Just like further back in time a Chevette or Pinto would.
Kind of like our unfortunate friend in the free credit report ad. Here we recognize the car as a Metro but I'd bet the majority in the country have forgotten that the Metro even existed - butthey recognize it visually as a real loser.
Gas prices drive Geos from clunkers to chic (CNN)
I like the looks of the little X90 too. It just doesn't say Pacer to me.
I still gotta vote Metro or Aspire or something in that vein - especially in a period color like purple or teal. Also, condition is important - it has to be messed up inside and outside, with an owner who doesn't care.
I don't think anything of that era screams Pacer. To a large degree the makers were playing it safer with design by then.
Plus, for the most part, the only Metro that got good gas mileage was the 3-cyl. And that meant you got the hatchback, manual tranny, and I believe, no a/c. If you wanted the 4-door, automatic, or a/c, you had to get the 4-cyl...which around town probably got about the same economy as a Corolla or Civic, and on the highway, barely beat out a LeSabre or Impala. :sick:
Yep.
At least when gas pops up. I think more "geek" than loser with the subcompacts like it and the Justy that never die off. The fact that people are paying crazy money to buy and fix them up is another strike against the loser status.
I can even justify owing a dustbuster minivan. Lots of us van fans don't have kids but most do, and being an obvious parent doesn't scream loser to me. Maybe if there's a goat in the back.
But I don't think you can limit the category to the condition of the car. Some pristine cars still say loser while a trashed out Miata still catches my eye.
I was gone for a week - did anyone put up a pic of an Aztek?
doesn't qualify...too new. IIRC the Aztek came out as a 2001 model.
At least when gas pops up. I think more "geek" than loser with the subcompacts like it and the Justy that never die off. The fact that people are paying crazy money to buy and fix them up is another strike against the loser status.
That reminds me of a story from years ago, early 1990's. One of my friends had friend that one of our mutual friends couldn't stand. He always called him "Muffin". At first, I thought it was because the dude was fat, but then I found out it was "because he's always muffin' things up". In general, he considered this dude a loser.
Well, one day, my friend got fed up with the "muffin" and "loser comments, and shot back "Well that 'loser' has a $70K per year job!" (back when a $70K job was probaby a big deal)
To which our other friend replied, "So what, he's a loser witha good job!" :P
Moral of this story? Paying big bucks for a loser car don't make it a winner. Just means you paid big bucks to have your legs sticking to the vinyl and your posse getting laughed at! :shades:
**oh, as for my friend who came up with the "muffin" name? At the time he was in his late 20's and living with Mommy and drove a K-car convertible that had been wrecked and put back together from two separate cars, and already had hair that was slightly receding, and prematurely graying. So what's that they say about living in glass houses and throwing stones? At least Muffin had a nice '85 Delta 88 Royale Brougham LS.
Jeeze, it seems like they've been around forever. Have to save it for the mid-20's loser cars discussion. :shades:
My dad really thought about buying a Pontiac dusbuster. But, for some reason he thought they were AWD, and when the things hit the streets and he learned they weren't, he had no interest.
Yes, a trashed cool car can still be cool...but a trashed dorky appliance isn't so cool.
I can't believe that woman in the article paid $7300 for a 96 3 cylinder Metro. Yeah, she'll save gas but she'll be driving many years before she saves enough to overcome the price premium she paid for the Metro and the loss she took on her Element.
She overpaid by about $5k on the Metro plus she'll suffer some depreciation on her Element = so she's about $7-8k backwards in total.
That's a lot of gas she could have bought. Even being overly optimistic and calculating that the Metro gets twice better fuel economy than the Element, she'll need to drive about 4 years in that sh!7box before she'll start coming out ahead and saving money on gas.
$100/week in Element = $5000/year.
$50/week in Metro = $2500/year
$2500/year savings = $7500 saved in 3 years = the amount of money she lost by overpaying for the Metro and for selling her Element.
But since gas prices dropped from their high point within a year to about 3/4 of what they were, it means she only saved the $2500 in the first year.
The next year:
$75/week in Element = $3750/year
$37.50/week in Metro = $1875/year
= savings of only $1875
So far over 2 years she saved $4375.
Next year she saves another $1875 = total is $6250
Another year of saving $1875 = $8125
So a more realistic figure is that it will take her about 4 years of driving in the Metro before she starts enjoying true gas savings over her Element.
Now I wonder if she offloaded the other Metros she bought for resale before gas prices interest in these old tin cans went down.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
In my neck of the woods, that definitely WOULDN'T be a point in his favor.....
:surprise:
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Maybe we're going about this the wrong way.
What did Napoleon Dynamite drive? (the 10 speed doesn't count).
We know that Uncle Rico drove a Dodge van but it's too old to be in the running.
Uncle Rico's Ride
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I only met Muffin a few times, but he annoyed me every single one of them. Probably haven't seen him since 1992 or so. My guess is that nowadays he has a Prius that he brags about hyper-miling when he's not busy trying to beat Freecell game #11982.
Something I just thought of...I wonder if the Grand Ville was actually the longest GM convertible by that time? GM stopped doing C-body convertibles. They also didn't let Pontiac have a C-body, so Pontiac just stretched out the B-body and on the closed models, grafted on a C-body roofline the best they could. Anyway, the Impala/Caprice convertible was on a 121.5" wb, while the Catalina, LeSabre, and Deltas were all on a 124". The Grand Ville was porked out to 126". An Eldorado was 126.3", but I wonder if the Grand Ville might have had more overhang, and therefore more overall length?
I'd go for the Astro. One of the biggest POC's I've ever had the displeasure to drive (my wife's uncle was disabled and had one with a rear lift).
Around here, you usually see Astros packed full of farm workers' family members. I guess it's the cheapest transportation with a lot of seats. And this is not a racial comment. It's just that who would possibly CHOOSE to drive this monstrosity if they had any sort of choice?
Also any compact or subcompact that has been modified with aftermarket accessories (think being riced out).
There is this one guy at work that drives a Ferrari untill you get close to it and notice that the interior is a Fiero with a kit body covering it (but I think that the Fiero was stopped in the 80's).
In reality anything from the mid 90's on would be a loser car unless it's a classic. Come on now if you cannot afford to drive a car less than 15 years old what does that say?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
It could say that you have a car that you like that runs well.
By all accounts he loves, think it was the first new car he ever bought, that car and the segments he has done on it are just kind of a tongue and cheek way of praise for it.
The Tercel is a good choice for a mid 90s loser car.
Later on you had the STR-4 Neons that dominated SCCA rally racing in the 2WD class up until the series was canceled.